Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

In my considered view, in directing as above, the ld. Executing Court has traversed far beyond its domain, inasmuch as, ld. Executing Court has gone on to grant reliefs which were declined/ not granted by the ld. Trial Court/ Lower Appellate Court/ and this Court. It is well established position in law that the jurisdiction of the Executing Court is only restricted to execution of the decree, and the Executing Court cannot go behind and/or beyond the decree. Accordingly, for the Executing Court to grant relief of consequential benefits to the respondent as above, which were not included in the decree, is beyond the jurisdiction of the ld. Executing Court.

In holding as above, I draw support from judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Vasudev Dhanjibhai Modi v. Rajabhai Abdul CR 3818/2016(O&M) 2023:PHHC:062302 Rehman, (SC): Law Finder Doc Id # 31042, wherein it has been categorically held as follows:

"6. A Court executing a decree cannot go behind the decree: between the parties or their representatives it must take the decree according to its tenor, and cannot entertain any objection that the decree was incorrect in law or on facts. Until it is set aside by an appropriate proceeding in appeal or revision, a decree even if it be erroneous is still binding between the parties.

(emphasis supplied) Support may also be drawn from judgment of this Court in Gurdev Singh v Punjab National Bank, Mandi Dabwali, Law Finder Doc Id # 30600, wherein it has been held as follows:

"A. Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Section 34 - Interest - Contract - Jurisdiction - Decree passed based on specific contract between parties - Relief of Interest granted at the rate of 12.5% P.A. - Execution filed - Plea of Petitioner was, being agricultural loan rate of interest in excess of 6% P.A. cannot be claimed - Respondent claimed contractual rate of RAJINDER PARSHAD JOSHI interest - Petitioner could not prove agricultural loan - Held, CR 3818/2016(O&M) 2023:PHHC:062302 Executing Court would not be in its jurisdiction to come to the conclusion whether the rate of interest awarded by the court of competent jurisdiction - Executing Court cannot go behind the decree".
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 Sections 21(1) and 47 Execution of decree - Objection as to jurisdiction - In execution proceeding objection raised relating to jurisdiction of Court to pass decree - Objection in execution did not relate to subject matter of suit - It was objection to territorial jurisdiction which does not travel to root of or to inherent lack of jurisdiction of civil court to entertain suit - Executing court cannot go behind decree and must execute decree as it stands - High Court was manifestly in error in coming to conclusion that it was within jurisdiction of executing court to decide whether decree in suit for partition was passed in absence of territorial jurisdiction - Judgment of High Court set aside."